NFT's - I laughed

[JAB]

Just for Spalls I thought I'd post this. Seth Green has his bored ape
NFT's 'stolen' from him and now he can't make a show. But I thought the
beauty of NFT's was it proved who owned them?

https://news.artnet.com/market/seth-greens-monkey-nft-stolen-saga-2121342

[Spalls Hurgenson]

On Thu, 26 May 2022 18:59:34 +0100, JAB <no...@nochance.com> wrote:

>Just for Spalls I thought I'd post this. Seth Green has his bored ape
>NFT's 'stolen' from him and now he can't make a show. But I thought the
>beauty of NFT's was it proved who owned them?

As they say, he who holds the deed owns the property. Mr. Green just
happened to hand the deed off to somebody else.

>https://news.artnet.com/market/seth-greens-monkey-nft-stolen-saga-2121342

I had already read that news, but it is welcome nonetheless. Much of
the news about NFTs has been quite welcome recently, in fact. I know
the damned things are /never/ going to go away completely - for God's
sake, AMWAY is still a thing! - but NFTs and crypto-currencies are
slowly trending away from 'that mysterious thing that you can maybe
make millions with' to 'ridiculous scams that use technology nobody
really understands' in the public consciousness, and that's a good
thing as far as I am concerned.

But honestly, I'll be all the happier if I /never/ have to discuss
NFTs again. Aside from maybe a few still-to-be-determined-but-quite
niche practical uses, the damn things belong in the dustbin of
history.

I'd rather discuss games and gaming-tangential topics like, for
instance, how my ancient 5.25" floppy drive is finally giving up the
ghost, putting a - temporary, I hope! - end to my accumulation of
ancient DOS games. And I think we all can agree that you can't call
yourself a /proper/ PC gamer without a 5.25" floppy drive ;-)

[Mike S.]

On Thu, 26 May 2022 14:44:55 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I'd rather discuss games and gaming-tangential topics like, for
>instance, how my ancient 5.25" floppy drive is finally giving up the
>ghost, putting a - temporary, I hope! - end to my accumulation of
>ancient DOS games. And I think we all can agree that you can't call
>yourself a /proper/ PC gamer without a 5.25" floppy drive ;-)

I kept all my 5.25 disks for every game I own so I hope that is close
enough to still call myself a proper PC gamer.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

On Fri, 27 May 2022 11:36:55 -0400, Mike S. <Mik...@nowhere.com>
wrote:

We're getting sort of into "a tree falls in the forest" area here. Is
a game on a 5.25" disk really a game if you don't have a disk drive
with which to read it?

Truly, one of the great philisophical conundrums of our era!

;-P

[Alan D Ray]

Geez I had SO many games on 5.25 floppies...not PC games but
Commodore 64 and Commodore 128 games. A lot I..yes..pirated..
but a lot I bought...I remember the EA games in the sleeve which
opened up. Using the SLOW 1541 disk drive on the C64, and
the faster 1571 drive on the 128.
And then I went to the Amiga...they used 3 1/2 inch disks. I started
with an Amiga 1000, and finally got an Amiga 3000 and that was
real good for awhile, but Commodore didn't know how to market
a "workstation-like" computer, so I traded it in for a 486DX PC
compatible system with a 5.25 inch drive.
(I also had at one time the Commodore PC clone...may have
been a PC-10, but got rid of that for a second hand 386 PC).
So many!
The 486DX was good for awhile, but when Duke Nuke'Em came
out...I couldn't play it about halfway in...got way too slow and
stuttered.
I think I then bought (stupid me) an Acer with a Pentium, which
had a weird case, which broke when I tried opening it up.
But it did play Duke Nuke'Em fine.
Many computers later I have a Dell XPS 8940 with 32G of RAM
(11th generation I-7 processor) and 6G of video ram. Also has
an 512G SSD card which I'm going to upgrade to a 2T card
once I move, which I am in the process of doing next week.
It's not state of the art, but plays everything I throw at it fine.
I'd HATE to see how much money I spent on this..uh hobby.





On Fri, 27 May 2022 13:27:18 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson

[Justisaur]

I might still have a 5.25" floppy game or two. I haven't had a 5.25"
drive in probably 2 decades though.

I had a 3.5" drive (I may even still have it) but the last motherboard
I bought didn't have anywhere to plug it in. I'm sure I still have a
number of 3.5" games, but I haven't touched them in ages mainly
due to the convenience of having tons of games downloadable.

- Justisaur

[Dimensional Traveler]

These days many pre-built PCs don't even include optical drives for
CD/DVD/Blu-Ray discs. Even those are getting phased out.


--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

[Werner P.]

Am 26.05.22 um 20:44 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
> But honestly, I'll be all the happier if I/never/ have to discuss

> NFTs again. Aside from maybe a few still-to-be-determined-but-quite
> niche practical uses, the damn things belong in the dustbin of
> history.

I bet THQ Nordic is laughing atm its "ass" off for getting Tomb Raider
and Deus Ex together with other franchises and studios for cheap because
Square wants to double down on NFTs instead of making actual games
people want to play.
That was the plunder of the year in the gaming scene and Square will
probably the biggest NFT victim in the long run!

[Justisaur]

Yeah, I didn't bother putting one of those in either, I've been through
something like 5 of those and they always seem to have problems.

I got a usb one we can plug in on anyone's computer when needed,
and that things a champ.

- justisaur

[Spalls Hurgenson]

On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:06:48 -0400, Alan D Ray <nal...@sccoast.net>
wrote:

>Geez I had SO many games on 5.25 floppies...not PC games but
>Commodore 64 and Commodore 128 games. A lot I..yes..pirated..
>but a lot I bought...I remember the EA games in the sleeve which
>opened up. Using the SLOW 1541 disk drive on the C64, and
>the faster 1571 drive on the 128.

>And then I went to the Amiga...they used 3 1/2 inch disks. I started
>with an Amiga 1000, and finally got an Amiga 3000 and that was
>real good for awhile, but Commodore didn't know how to market
>a "workstation-like" computer, so I traded it in for a 486DX PC
>compatible system with a 5.25 inch drive.

Ah, the glory days of the 5.25" drive; what a nightmare. Because it
wasn't just that a drive was 5.25" back then... it was 5.25" and low
density or high density or single sided or double sided or 360kb or
720kb or 1.2mb or... or... or... It was a nightmare of compatibility
issues and that doesn't even get into the differences between how the
computers FORMATTED the damn things (I lost so much data when I
switched off the Apple ][).

3.5" was a little better; cross-platform compatibility - while not the
norm - was becoming more of a concern and it was easier to read off
the data put onto a 3.5" disk regardless if it sourced from a Amiga,
Mac or PC. It required the correct translation software but at least
hardware compatibility wasn't all over the place. There were fewer
types of formats too; just 720kb, 1.44mb and 2.88mb. But while the
design of the 3,5" floppy was ruggedized, it also saw the gradual
decline of quality (and reliability) as producers started cheaping out
on the manufacturing.

CD-ROMs - and especially the burnable variety - couldn't come fast
enough. In the interim, I relied increasingly on other mediums: tapes
and ZIP disks primarily. Despite the cost and terror of the "click of
death", I adored Iomega's ZIP disks. Many of my games from that era
had their floppies imaged to ZIP disks because the damn things were
faster, more reliable, and I could store a hundred floppies onto a
single disk (already back then, the physical space of storing all my
games was becoming a major concern).

Still, while I nominally having nothing but disdain for floppies, I
have to admit there is a bit of a warm spot in my heart for the
tedious chorse of installing a game by inserting one floppy after
another into the drive. Watching that progress bar inch forward
whenever you swapped disks was always a bit exciting; "Four disks out
of five, my game is almost installed!" A part of me misses that;
modern installers - where all you do is click a button and it
downloads and installs the game automatically - can't compare.

But on the whole, I'm happier that floppies are now a luxury rather
than a necessity.

[JAB]

I missed the whole floppy drive era as I started with an Atari ST, had a
ten or so year break and by the time I got a PC it was all CD-ROMS and
3.5" disks. I did use them at work though and once had a moment of panic
when I opened the window and a gust of wind caught one sitting on the
window sill and it was gone. To make it worse it held classified
material so I ran as fast as I could (we were on the forth floor) to
retrieve it from the street below.

[JAB]

That's one of the things I've never had a problem with. The only reason
I got a new one was because a refresh of my PC meant I didn't have
anywhere to plug it in any more. For the average user you can see why
they aren't much use when everything is just a click away.

[Anssi Saari]

Spalls Hurgenson <spallsh...@gmail.com> writes:

> I'd rather discuss games and gaming-tangential topics like, for
> instance, how my ancient 5.25" floppy drive is finally giving up the
> ghost, putting a - temporary, I hope! - end to my accumulation of
> ancient DOS games. And I think we all can agree that you can't call
> yourself a /proper/ PC gamer without a 5.25" floppy drive ;-)

Damn. Or wait, does any 5.25" floppy drive count? Even if the drive
can't easily read or write PC formats, like the venerable Commodore
1541? Or actually as I have a Commodore 1571 too, I think it actually
can read and write those. Phew, seems I can still count myself a proper
PC gamer.

Although I think I left even the 3.5" floppy drive out of my gaming PC
around the year 2000 or thereabouts. Just no use for it as I got a Zip
drive and then a CD writer around the late 90s. I got quite sick of the
"general failure reading drive a:" errors so wasn't sad to see the
format go.

[Ross Ridge]

Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>These days many pre-built PCs don't even include optical drives for
>CD/DVD/Blu-Ray discs. Even those are getting phased out.

I'd sas optical drives are already phased out at this point. In the
build-it-yourself market, if you want a case with a 5.25" external
bay you're pretty much limited to older mostly discountinued models.
No one buys PC software on optical media anymore and no one is watching
movies on DVD or Blu-Ray either.

--
l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU
[oo][oo] rri...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
-()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca:11068/
db //

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 5/29/2022 8:38 AM, Ross Ridge wrote:
> Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>> These days many pre-built PCs don't even include optical drives for
>> CD/DVD/Blu-Ray discs. Even those are getting phased out.
>
> I'd sas optical drives are already phased out at this point. In the
> build-it-yourself market, if you want a case with a 5.25" external
> bay you're pretty much limited to older mostly discountinued models.
> No one buys PC software on optical media anymore and no one is watching
> movies on DVD or Blu-Ray either.
>

I still watch movies on disc. My own collection is large and streaming
services are only viable with a faster connection than I can get as well
as becoming rapidly even more too expensive.

[Mike S.]

On Sun, 29 May 2022 15:38:56 -0000 (UTC), rri...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
(Ross Ridge) wrote:

>I'd sas optical drives are already phased out at this point. In the
>build-it-yourself market, if you want a case with a 5.25" external
>bay you're pretty much limited to older mostly discountinued models.
>No one buys PC software on optical media anymore and no one is watching
>movies on DVD or Blu-Ray either.

I don't build my own machines so I don't pay attention to what is
happening in PC hardware but I bought my current computer in January
2020 and even then, it came without drive bays of any kind so I
definitely believe you.

I do not miss optical media at all. I am not even remotely nostalgic
for CDs and DVDs. I guess they aren't old enough for that.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

On Sun, 29 May 2022 16:50:57 +0300, Anssi Saari <a...@sci.fi> wrote:
>Spalls Hurgenson <spallsh...@gmail.com> writes:

>> I'd rather discuss games and gaming-tangential topics like, for
>> instance, how my ancient 5.25" floppy drive is finally giving up the
>> ghost, putting a - temporary, I hope! - end to my accumulation of
>> ancient DOS games. And I think we all can agree that you can't call
>> yourself a /proper/ PC gamer without a 5.25" floppy drive ;-)

>Damn. Or wait, does any 5.25" floppy drive count? Even if the drive
>can't easily read or write PC formats, like the venerable Commodore
>1541? Or actually as I have a Commodore 1571 too, I think it actually
>can read and write those. Phew, seems I can still count myself a proper
>PC gamer.

Well, seeing as "PC" stands for personal computer, and the Commodore
series was, indeed, a personal computer, I guess it counts. It even
counts if all you owned was the Commodore 1571, and not a PC to attach
it to, since those drives were in and of themselves stand-alone
computers (albeit with limited IO).

I really should have specified "a proper IBM PC-compatible gamer" had
I wanted to be more exclusive ;-)

>Although I think I left even the 3.5" floppy drive out of my gaming PC
>around the year 2000 or thereabouts. Just no use for it as I got a Zip
>drive and then a CD writer around the late 90s. I got quite sick of the
>"general failure reading drive a:" errors so wasn't sad to see the
>format go.

Floppies were fairly reliable for a long time... it was only starting
around the 90s that they started to gain their reputation for
flakiness. A lot of disks for 8-bit computers are still perfectly
readable, despite being haphazardly stored for decades. But as price
margins started dropping in the 90s, the quality control and materials
of disks started to get cut back, and we all ended up with those
one-use wonders we've since grown to loathe.

But 'back in the day' you could treat floppies with a good deal of
abuse and still have a reasonable chance of getting data off of it.

I'm still glad we're past that era, though. For all there's a
satisfying nostalgia of sliding in a disk and hearing that solid chunk
as the disk drives engaged, the convenience and speed of modern
storage devices more than makes up for their loss in tactility.

[JAB]

On 29/05/2022 17:21, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 5/29/2022 8:38 AM, Ross Ridge wrote:
>> Dimensional Traveler  <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>> These days many pre-built PCs don't even include optical drives for
>>> CD/DVD/Blu-Ray discs.  Even those are getting phased out.
>>
>> I'd sas optical drives are already phased out at this point.  In the
>> build-it-yourself market, if you want a case with a 5.25" external
>> bay you're pretty much limited to older mostly discountinued models.
>> No one buys PC software on optical media anymore and no one is watching
>> movies on DVD or Blu-Ray either.
>>
> I still watch movies on disc.  My own collection is large and streaming
> services are only viable with a faster connection than I can get as well
> as becoming rapidly even more too expensive.
>

I've probably got about eighty or so DVD's although a lot of them came
from before it was so easy to stream a film. Now I do still but DVD's
but only the ones I think that a film I want to keep to watch multiple
times. I've also found that quite often it's actually cheaper to buy the
DVD than stream it.

There's something just nice about having a physical copy and for some
odd reason it's nicer to watch. It's a variant on if a film is on TV I'm
more inclined to watch it even though I could stream it anytime I want.

The biggest problem I find with the DVD player though is that as we
don't use it that often it can be a let's find where I left the remote
control task.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

No one will be surprised, I am sure, to discover that I have a fairly
large library of DVDs too (because of course I do). But - similar to
how I did with my floppy disks - I imaged (well, ripped) the media to
hard-drive almost as soon as I started collecting them. Even then,
hard-drives were cheap enough that I could store hundreds of DVDs on a
network drive. The added convenience of being able to stream them to
TVs (originally with an old laptop hooked up to each flatscreen; later
with smartTVs and roku devices) meant my entire collection was
available at my fingertips anywhere in the house without having to
worry about DVD players or discs or any of that nonesense.

These days - with Netflix and other streaming services - I don't
bother with the locally-stored DVD images as much; the quality of
those rips is usually significantly poorer than what I can get from
the internet - but they do still see some use when a movie isn't
otherwise available.

I still have all the disks, though, neatly stored away a closet. A
very full closet.

Pretty much all of my computers still have optical drives though,
either internally or connected via USB. Although infrequently used,
they still see /just/ enough use to make me miss them when they aren't
there. And I'm pretty sure when I get a new computer, that one will
come with an optical drive too.

[JAB]

I've also got a large collection of CD's and still like them but I had a
bit of shock when I had to replace the CD/radio in the car. Wanting one
that has a CD player really limits your options and you can't get one
without all the bells and whistles. I just want one that has a radio and
CD player so I really don't care if it's got Spotify inbuilt. If I can
be bothered (I probably can't) I might set it up so I can use my phone
hands free.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

I don't wanna talk about NFTs. You don't wanna talk about NFTs. Nobody
- except the people who want you to buy into the scam - wants to talk
about NFTs.

But I'm sorry; I just couldn't resist.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/nfts-have-fallen-off-the-cliff-as-sales-sink-to-lowest-in-year?sref=oioIU9CW#xj4y7vzkg

*titter*

And cryptocurrencies aren't doing much better either. What a shame.

You know, you just have to wonder: if NFTs hadn't started with such
awful art, would it have failed so tremendously? Imagine if - instead
of 'bored apes' - they were selling illustrations that didn't make you
gag? Even if everything else had been the same - no real ownership,
copyright issues, etc. etc. - I think the world would have reacted
more favorably (or at least, not turned against the idea quite so
radically) if their 'goods' weren't quite so hideous.

Of course, real art costs money, which is why the scammers instead
pumped out the cheapest, ugliest, procedurally generated crap that
they could. But this sort of short-sightedness cost them in the end.

So sad; can you see my tears?

* tee-hee *

[Justisaur]

I'd be happy (o.k. I am a little happy,) but everything's going in the
crapper. Not quite at the rate the cryptocurrency has been though.

- Justisaur

[JAB]

I'd like to laugh but I fear the crypto bros made money from NFT's and
it's the people who were sucked in by the hype that got burnt.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:32:32 +0100, JAB <no...@nochance.com> wrote:
>On 30/06/2022 16:27, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>> But I'm sorry; I just couldn't resist.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/nfts-have-fallen-off-the-cliff-as-sales-sink-to-lowest-in-year?sref=oioIU9CW#xj4y7vzkg

>> *titter*

>> And cryptocurrencies aren't doing much better either. What a shame.

>I'd like to laugh but I fear the crypto bros made money from NFT's and
>it's the people who were sucked in by the hype that got burnt.

Certainly, but a) they were hoping to make even more, and odds have
slimmed on that happening, b) some of them certainly were left holding
the bag when the whole thing started tumbling down, so its likely
they've felt SOME of the burn, even if they weren't ruined by it, and
c) this hopefully helps put paid to the "ideals" behind the
crypto-currencies, which would have been quite horrible had they taken
off in the way the true believers wanted.

Even big-name game publishers which once were raging about how NFTs
were going to be a prominent part of their business moving forward
have largely shut up about it.

Its good news, and while some of the bad guys may have slipped the
net, others have not. I take joy from that. Allow me my pleased
titters ;-)

[JAB]

I suppose that's the positive. What really brought it home to me was
seeing a video about Call of Cthulhu NFT's. The introduction was just
about what they were but the bulk of it was showing how the price had
changed over time and the decision making of when to get into the market
and when to exit it. Basically get in before a games events and get out
shortly afterwards before the price fell again. It became clear that
this is nothing to do with digital collectibles but instead funnelling
money from the majority, who don't know better, to a minority.

Surely the idea of collectibles is to, well collect them not buy and
sell them?

[Dimensional Traveler]

Even in traditional, physical object collectibles the majority were in
it to make a profit. Comic books are an example of this. In the 80s
buying comic books became (one of many) "The Thing" that was going to
make Joe Public wealthy. The prices that old comics were selling for in
auctions and such was high and getting higher. So lots of people
started buying comics in the expectation that in 10 to 20 years they'd
be able to resell them for BIG PROFITS!(tm) Didn't happen, largely
because so many people had comics they were now trying to sell that
there was a glut on the market and the prices offered were pitiful.

The same thing repeated in Collectible Card Games.

[JAB]

I'm not saying people don't do it but instead at it's core NFT's are
just about money nothing else. At least I can read a comic!

I've also seen it with model kits where people have bought two at the
same time with the expectation they will be worth a lot more later. They
were right, well up to the point that the company thought why should
they be making all the money when we can just re-release it.

Saying that I bought a bottle of single cask whiskey about fifteen years
ago for £200 and a few years ago out of curiosity I checked how much it
would cost now. The price, if you can find one, was £1000. That puts me
in the strange situation of I certainly wouldn't pay that much for it
but nor do I want to sell it.

[Dimensional Traveler]

Even if you did sell it _you_ wouldn't get 1,000 pound for it. ;)

[Spalls Hurgenson]

I hate myself for posting this. I mean, more crap about NFTs, really?
Does anyone really want to go over this stuff again? But here I go,
one more time. Anyway, this one is related to games, so that makes it
more acceptable, right? Right?!?

Regardless, I liked this news about NFTs for a change. Mojang -
developers of "Minecraft" - have put their foot down when it comes to
NFTs*. Not only have they stated they aren't putting NFTs in their
game, they also made it clear that NFTs aren't welcome in Minecraft if
anyone else puts them there too. More precisely, "integrations of NFTs
with Minecraft are generally not something we will support or allow".

They also go on to specify, "NFTs and other blockchain technologies
... [do] not align with Minecraft values of creative inclusion and
playing together ... The speculative pricing and investment mentality
around NFTs takes the focus away from playing the game and encourages
profiteering..."

Plus, you know, it's all a scam and you basically have no guarantee
that what you pay for today will be there tomorrow ('cept they say it
more formal-like, instead sayin' "NFTs may not be reliable and may end
up costing players who buy them" ;-)

It's nice to see a company come down hard on NFTs like this; there are
still a few that are dabbling with the idea, and others have been
pretty wishy-washy about it. But Minecraft still remains immensely
popular (170 million players / month), especially amongst the younger
set, and it's nice to see a company not victimize their playerbase
with NFTs.

Well, that's all I got. I'll try to resist commenting on NFTs for the
next few weeks. ;-)





-----------------------
* https://www.minecraft.net/en-us/article/minecraft-and-nfts

[Dimensional Traveler]

Shirley that last word was intended to be "minutes", wasn't it? :D

[JAB]

I think it's good that a big player like this makes this type of
statement. It's not just because it means they won't be in Minecraft but
it also raises the exposure of what NFT's are really about. They're not
digital collectibles and it's not because you're just too stupid to
understand why the so brilliant for gamers.

[JAB]

Well NFT Worlds is fighting back, well trying to anyway but the phrase
epic fail comes to mind.

Some highlights from what they said are:

- Microsoft are stifling creative yet they can't seem to explain how
NFT's would add creative or indeed improve player experience. Maybe it's
because people are just too stupid to understand.
- They are going to produce their own game which is Minecraft like. Well
good luck with trying that.
- The new game won't be shackled with such ridiculous notions that you
can't spend as much money on in-game content as you like.
- This is a web 2.0 vs web 3.0 battle for the future of a player owned
and operated economy. Somewhat giving the game away there as to what
NFT's are about.

So in summary Microsoft have made a decision to protect the player
experience and stop people profiteering off their IP yet they are the
bad guys. I'm not sure how that's supposed to work.

A link to the story, it also has a link to the full announcement if you
want a giggle.

https://www.gamesradar.com/nft-company-will-make-its-own-minecraft-game-with-the-same-playstyle-look-and-feel-following-mojang-ban/

[Dimensional Traveler]

That's ... a seriously schizophrenic press release.

[JAB]

To me it just comes across as trying to bolster NFT's bro's belief that
they are doing the right thing and web 3.0 is the way forward. I can't
imagine your average gamer reading it and thinking, oh yeh they're
making some really valid points there.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

On Thu, 26 May 2022 18:59:34 +0100, JAB <no...@nochance.com> wrote:

I'd just like to note that it's been two weeks and I haven't said word
one about NFTs in all that time. You're welcome.

But, seeing as it /has/ been two weeks, I'm sure you'll forgive me if
I talk about it just a little bit, right? Oh, where to start?!?


Well, it looks like Sony was trying to gauge player interest on
Playstation NFTs... and got an immediate (and frankly, completely
predictable) response. Sony as a 'loyalty program' for fans that
offers 'rewards' for various purchases made through its storefront. It
asked if players were interested in some of the rewards and items
being made for sale should be NFTs because apparently they've missed
the last six months of everybody saying "hell no!" to the idea every
time it's been brought up. And guess what happened? Everybody shouted
'hell no' again.* But I wouldn't bet an ugly ape GIF that Sony has
learned anything from all this, not when there's easy money to be made
fleecing the rubes. Stay classy, Sony.


Epic Games, on the other hand stuck to their guns when it comes to
NFTs.** "Sure players time and time again have indicated that this is
the last thing they'd ever want in games, but we wouldn't want to keep
our partners - or ourselves - from making a quick buck. Who cares if
it results in shitty games? We're talking money," Epic CEO Tim Sweeney
was probably paraphrased to say. Well, okay, what he actually said was
"stores shouldn't interfere by forcing their views onto others," even
though stores have been doing this since forever and Epic themselves
aren't exempt. Not when there's easy money to be made fleecing the
rubes. Stay classy, Epic.


Then, of course, there was that story about Gamestop getting into the
business of selling NFTs (because there's never been a scummy business
practice that company hasn't looked favorably upon), and accidentally
opening their platform to video game piracy as a variety of
copyrighted games were 'sold' through that program.** Or rather,
tokens that linked to the game's location on the distributed
file-serving IPFS system. Remember, NFTs are touted of an
incontrovertible proof of your legal ownership of an item... even if
its stolen goods and anybody can access it. Gamestop has since
suspended the account of the reseller, but the NFTs already sold are
still live on Gamestop's content servers, which are used to host
cached copies of the game. Why back down now when there's easy money
to be made fleecing the rubes? Stay classy, Gamestop.


And that's just the top three big game-related NFT failures of the
past couple of weeks. I could go on but - out of pity for the rest of
you - I'll stop. But it amuses me just how stupidly these companies
are with regards to NFTs; they're greed and lack of concern at
offering a product people actually want is immediately apparent to
anyone, yet they keep at it despite the potential harm to their brand.
At this point, any company that is showing interest in the damn things
is not only being blatantly scummy, but obviously stupid as well...
and yet, some companies keep promoting the things. So, like the topic
says - "NFTs: I laughed" because the only other alternative is to cry.

But enough of all that for now. I'll try to resist temptation for
another couple of weeks. No promises though; not when these companies
offer so much juicy dirt. ;-)


-------
*
https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2022/08/immediate-backlash-as-sony-asks-players-about-purchasing-nfts

**
https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/epic-wont-ban-nft-games-in-response-to-minecrafts-stance-tim-sweeney-says/

***
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/gamestop-nft-marketplace-sold-indie-games-without-permission-devs-say/1100-6506208/

[JAB]

On 08/08/2022 22:24, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> And that's just the top three big game-related NFT failures of the
> past couple of weeks. I could go on but - out of pity for the rest of
> you - I'll stop. But it amuses me just how stupidly these companies
> are with regards to NFTs; they're greed and lack of concern at
> offering a product people actually want is immediately apparent to
> anyone, yet they keep at it despite the potential harm to their brand.
> At this point, any company that is showing interest in the damn things
> is not only being blatantly scummy, but obviously stupid as well...
> and yet, some companies keep promoting the things. So, like the topic
> says - "NFTs: I laughed" because the only other alternative is to cry.
>

For me NFT's in a game would be an immediate no buy and I'd probably be
willing to boycott a publisher for it also. With a digital games store
it's definitely a mark down as if you're more than happy to take a cut
out of games that have NFT's what does that say about how you view your
customers.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

Before I continue, in my defense:

1) it's been over a month since I brought up NFTs (you wouldn't
believe the will-power it required! So many stories slipped by
uncommented! I should be sainted for my forbearance!)

2) what I'm talking about isn't just a chance to bash NFTs, but is
actually gaming related!

(Also, even though I've been pretty snarky towards Ubisoft in recent
posts, it's pure coincidence that I'm taking the piss out of that
company again.)


Anyway, Ubisoft - one of the big pushers of NFTs-in-games amongst the
triple-A publishers - is now walking back some of their initial
promises.* Quartz - the Ubisoft NFT platform - is essentially dead at
this point and, as Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot says, the company is
'basically in research mode' on the topic now.

(Research as in "Why doesn't anyone want this valueless crap we're
hawking?" Maybe you should have done this before you spent millions on
Quartz? Just thinking outside the box here)

Interestingly, Ubisoft is now referring to the whole thing as "Web3
technologies", further distancing the company from even the word NFT,
which has taken on very negative connotations as people become more
and more aware of what a scam it is. "Oh no, we're not interested in
NFTs; who wants that junk? But this Web3 stuff; nobody knows what that
is so we can still maybe fleece some suckers if we use a different
term."

(It's a good thing we can't see through your sly stratagem, Ubisoft.)

But out of all the interview, I think I personally enjoyed this quote
the most:

"We should have said we were working on it, and when we have something
that gives you a real benefit, we'll bring it to you. "

In other words, even Ubisoft now admits their Quartz platform didn't
offer players 'a real benefit'. Good to know, thanks Ubisoft.

Still, the idea of NFTs in games is not completely dead at Ubisoft,
(which probably means Guillemot and other C-level execs still have
some Ethereum/Bitcoin they couldn't convert to real cash without
taking a loss) so the threat remains. But at least the imminent danger
of this crap being foisted onto the market is lessened.


(although Square Enix /is/ joining forces with Oasys**, a blockchain
company that is also partnered with Ubisoft. Then again, Square Enix
is floundering pretty badly these days (it's shedding its valuable IPS
left and right just to keep it afloat) so it's interest in NFTs is
likely a last-ditch attempt to keep the company going.)



Look, I can't promise another month before more NFT snark, but I'll
try, I'll try. ;-)

==================
* read more here
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/yves-guillemot-i-think-we-are-a-company-that-can-be-proud-of-itself
(the first half of the article is about Ubisoft's problematic employee
relations; the blockchain stuff is further down)
** here's some info on that:
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/square-enix-dive-headfirst-into-the-uncharted-waters-of-blockchain-gaming

[JAB]

On 13/09/2022 02:01, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> (It's a good thing we can't see through your sly stratagem, Ubisoft.)
>
> But out of all the interview, I think I personally enjoyed this quote
> the most:
>
> "We should have said we were working on it, and when we have something
> that gives you a real benefit, we'll bring it to you. "
>
> In other words, even Ubisoft now admits their Quartz platform didn't
> offer players 'a real benefit'. Good to know, thanks Ubisoft.

Well quite, I've yet to hear a good explanation of how gamers get to
benefit from NFT's besides you now have a second job that doesn't get
close to minimum wage.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

Oh, there are so many benefits!

You can buy a digital hat that's unique to you... if by unique you
mean it's exactly the same as all the other hats except it has a
slightly different serial number.

And you OWN the hat... except you don't own the copyright, and can't
actually change what the hat looks like, and are reliant on Ubisoft's
good graces to host it and if they don't like your attitude (or if
they just don't feel like supporting the platform anymore) they can
yank your ability to use the hat on their services.

But that hat; why, you could use it on a digital avatar in multiple
games! Assuming Ubisoft builds support for that hat into all its other
games. Which it generally hasn't.

Technically, non-Ubisoft games could support that hat too! Except,
since YOU don't own the copyright to the hat and THEY don't own the
copyright to the hat, adding that hat to a non-Ubisoft game would be a
legal minefield (although I'm sure that Ubisoft might allow it if they
get a cut of the profits).

Did I mention you can resell the hat for oodles of cash? That's
assuming you can find anyone to pay you anything for it, especially
after the initial rush of enthusiasm for NFTs has died away and
everyone realizes they're just a fad and have no intrinsic worth. But
if you spend lots of money and keep working at it, you can maybe find
someone stupider than you and make a bundle. Doesn't that sound like
fun?

Plus, you can show your absolute disdain for the environment with that
hat. Because even though the blockchain Ubisoft uses isn't quite as
computationally heavy as others, it's still far more energy-intensive
than flipping a bit or three in a database.

But of course, that's all for the good because there's no other way to
allow digital hats that you can resell or transfer between games
except to use a blockchain... except of course there is and (IIRC)
it's actually been done before. But nevermind that, Web3 is the
future! You don't wanna be an old codger mired in the past, do you?

I don't know why people are so down on the concept when there are so
many exciting features! I'm a big fan, can't ya tell?





(this is a reply to somebody else's post, so it doesn't count as
breaking my once-per-month rule on NFT posts. ;-)

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 9/13/2022 8:10 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> But nevermind that, Web3 is the
> future! You don't wanna be an old codger mired in the past, do you?
>

Yes, actually, I do. :P